Gingrich/Huntsman Lincoln-Douglas debate Monday at 10:27pm ET

This is a late update on this debate mainly due to C-SPAN’s late decision to air the event later this evening. The debate will take place Monday at Saint Anselm College in Manchester, New Hampshire. The event takes place at 4pm ET but will not be broadcast on C-SPAN until 10:27pm ET when it can be streamed online or viewed on television. The focus will primarily delve into national security and foreign policy.

A little-known former Congressman named Abraham Lincoln ran against incumbent Sen. Stephen Douglas in 1858, and the two men subsequently engaged in a series of seven epic debates across their home state of Illinois. Although Lincoln would lose that senate race to Douglas, the notoriety of the Lincoln-Douglas debates catalyzed Honest Abe’s successful bid for president in 1860.

Jon Huntsman Jr. and GOP frontrunner Newt Gingrich will stage a one-on-one, Lincoln-Douglas debate Monday in New Hampshire — and by hearkening back to yesteryear both men seek to break Mitt Romney ‘s stranglehold on Republican support in the Granite State.

Huntsman’s campaign website indicates the debate will be “on foreign policy and national security.” It will begin at 4 p.m. ET and can be steamed online at or viewed on television when C-SPAN rebroadcasts the event at 10:27 p.m. ET.

If you do miss this event, have no fear, we’ll link to the C-SPAN replay. It is not being broadcast live anyway so we’ll all be watching the taped event. Once again, sorry for the delayed notification. This event was brought together only in the last week and a half and C-SPAN only decided in recent days to air the event.

Update

There has been a huge discrepancy in the times reported from C-SPAN. Originally scheduled for 8pm ET airing on C-SPAN, it seems that is not the case. According to C-SPAN, it will now air at 9:42pm ET and then re-air again on December 13th at 1:04am ET.

Either way, click this link to watch the replay online if you want to watch it before it airs:

Nate Ashworth is the Founder and Editor-In-Chief of Election Central. He's been blogging elections and politics for almost a decade. He started covering the 2008 Presidential Election which turned into a full-time political blog in 2012 and 2016.

69 COMMENTS

LATINOS FOR HONEST GOVERNMENT
Juan Reynoso’s Blog – TeaParty.orghttp://grassrootstexans.net/pages/home/
December 12th, 2011
America the Government by the Corporations and for the Corporations.
Fellow Americans, ignorance and apathy allowed this corrupt system of government to grow and flourished to become what it is today;”A Government by the Corporations for the Corporations”.
The truth is, that the Washington politicians are puppets of the big corporations. For many years the Lobbies of “K” street function have being to connect the corporations with the Washington’s politicians to make them pass legislations that will benefit the corporations and made them rich at the expenses of many countries and the people of this United states. Foreign countries and Americans that love this country, do not hate the American people, they hate this corrupt government that use his power to destroy the life of millions of people by military intervention and by the destruction of the economic and stability in foreign countries. Fellow Americans this is our country and our duty and responsibility is to change this corrupt government, we can not continue this path of self destruction by electing politicians that are part of the establishment, puppets of the big corporations.
Fellow Americans the only candidates that are not part of the establishment are:
Ron Paul and Jon Huntsman, but the Washington establishment want Newt Grigrich or Mitt Romney they will expend millions to make sure that Mitt or Newt replace Obama, they know that Obama is a risk, that is why they are pushing for their second best choices, to continue their work, lobbyist want in the White house and Congress, these career politicians who, year after years take the PAC and lobbyist money and vote for the kinds of economic and foreign policy and legislations that have gotten us in the mess that we are in. Americans do not want more of the same they want real change and we should not let the insiders and their money destroy our country and our world image.
Fellow Americans, vote for America. We must work with passion to clean up Washington and throw all them out. Check their voting record on immigration and free trade.http://www.thepeopledecide.us/http://www.visi.com/juan/congress/
Michele Bachmann
Newt Gingrich
Ron Paul
Rick Perry

I can’t believe people FALL for Newt Gingrich’s “Staged” Choreography Nonsense with this “Lincoln/Douglas Debate Show”. Don’t people do any research anymore and look at a Candidate’s Record? IT’S ALL FOR SHOW, FOLKS!

Jon Huntsman is “Debating” (if that’s what you call it) Newt Gingrich at the “Lincoln/Douglas” Debate Show on December 12th. Herman Cain did the last one with Gingrich. If Herman Cain’s Campaign was any kind of Litmus Test, this Lincoln/Douglas Debate Show with Gingrich appears to be the “Consolation Prize” for a Candidate as he “Exits” the 2012 Presidential Campaign. Huntsman may be the next Contestant and the Consolation Prize winner.

After this “so-called” Lincoln/Douglas Debate, the “haughty” Newt Gingrich (mimicking Donald Trump) “winks” to the crowd as he silently “Fires” each Candidate that participates in this Forum (“Firing” with a touch of class. Don’t you think?). And a few days later, Newt, then DECLARES himself the Winner of the Debate and says “I’m the GOP Nominee!” That’s how it works in “Newt’s World”. It’s all about Perception and Choreography…

Just thinking: It was originally Newt who stated he would challenge Barack Obama to seven Lincoln-Douglas style debates if he became the nominee.

Today Newt is debating Jon Huntsman. Newt is highest in the polls, Huntsman is the lowest in the polls.

As a matter of strategy, would it not benefit both Ron Paul and Mitt Romney, who are not far behind Newt, to suggest debating Newt in separate one-on-one debates? They would each get more air time and an opportunity to present their platforms without being confined to one minute answers.

Newt wouldn’t Debate Ron Paul. Ron Paul would have Newt “Spinning in Circles” and would have Newt on the Defensive throughout the Debate. Especially on Monetary Policy, the FED, the Rule of Law, the Constitution and Foreign Policy. After all, Newt is only an “Historian”. (At least that what he says when confronted about his Anti-Conservative Record and his dealings with Freddie Mack)

I try not to say negative things about a person that blogs. But, guys you are getting ridiculous. It looks like Ron Paul’s blind followers are already trolling this blog. This debate does not even have Ron Paul as a debater!!! It hasn’t even started!! They seem to be more like Democrat’s 99%’ers, following with no idea of what they are doing.

So , Ron Paul followers are Blind? Yet Newt has no morals and is ,took money from Fanny Mae. But they are not Blind? So they are intentionally supporting someone that has shown he will be even more corrupt than Bush and Obama added together.

Ron Paul has been in Politics for 30 years and he has not flip flopped or cheated on his wife and then married that woman. He has Predicted every Bubble and Newt has actually taken Ron Pauls Talking Points.

It is amazing that you can pay a few shills to attack Ron Paul followers and sheeple will buy into it.

And ONLY Ron Paul supporters, like me, get rebuked for multiple posts (see below). Everyone else, is ok. Sounds like the same type of people who moderate the debates and who “limit” Ron Paul, are the same type of people who moderate these Blogs. If THEY don’t agree with you, you’re rebuked, limited and demonized.

Fellow Americans, are we blind, that we are not able to see, that this system of Government is control by the Washington lobbyist. Today our country is on the path of self destruction, we must cut expenses and balance the national budget, not one of the Republican candidates will be able to do a better job on this matter but Ron Paul; electing him to office will be the salvation of this United States.
Vote for America in 2012 – Vote for Ron Paul.

Typical right wing argument. I DONT LIKE HIS CLOTHES> He must shake hands like a limp fish. HE IS TO OLD> You are an ass and should not have the privilege of voting. What happened to choosing a candidate based on their past decisions, indiscretions, policy decisions, moral character, etc…

He has bags under his eyes, he must not sleep,…YES because he is too busy defending your rights outlined in the constitution. You are a TRUE ASS

It’s a fact of life, the only way to become # 1 is by competing against the Best.
When Newt Gingrich was The Speaker of The House, He was a Leader not a Follower,and
He Got things Done even when members in His own Party disagreed with Him.
Today those same members of the House hold a Grudge, and speak negatively about Gingrich even though they have plenty of Skeletons in
their own closet. The Best Person to Lead Our Country this Great Nation in 2012 is ” Newt Gingrich “.

Oh gosh being a speaker doesn’t mean jack! Newt has way more skeletons in his cabinet than any other republican candidate running for the nomination. He is the real deal RINO. He left his own party due to his bad history and reputation and became a Republican just to run away from it all… He is a real peace of work! and would undoubtedly get slaughtered by the democrats on so many levels.

Ron Paul is fantastic to listen to. He has great ideas about our involvement on foreign land, our history of the same, our need to focus on domestic issues, and an entirely different and refreshing perspective on where we should be focused and involved as a nation. As much as I like his perspectives, I don’t believe we could make a significant change within a reasonable time along his lines of thinking. Ron Paul’s ideas, if implemented, would attempt to completely overhaul government, and we are simply not in a position to make the attempt to tear down and rebuild right now. We’ve got more pressing issues that demand our immediate attention. I also don’t believe that Ron Paul could lead such a charge. I don’t think he has the voice, the stature, or the support within and outside of government to effect such a radical change.

For the latino blog guy with the limited insight, how do you propose that jobs get created in this country, if not by corporations? Who do you work for, the mom and pop five and dime on the corner? How’s that working for ya? Your blog is just another worn out, negative, pessimistic view of things, typically written by less than average narcissists that love to cop a little air time. Grow up. “…the only candidates that are not part of the establishment are: Ron Paul and Jon Huntsman, but the Washington establishment want Newt Grigrich or Mitt Romney…” blah blah blah. Drone on. The polls are “of the people, by the people.” Ah, forget it. I’m done workin’ on you. Get a message, get a campaign, get a following, get put on the ballot, and run against the competitors and their messages for how to make a better nation and a better world. Otherwise, put your head in a barf bag before you vomit.

How does a government serve well the millions of people that make up a nation? How are decisions made about the role of Federal Government and how they serve 50 states, or the role of the states in serving the people? How are decisions made about our nation’s safety with regard to threats in foreign lands? There will be waste, there will be corruption, decisions will be made with influence by lobbyists, individuals, and organizations that can negotiate a deal for a little of what they want and a little of what government wants in order to serve the people. We’re the best nation in the world. Our government struggles with the same issues we all struggle with, individually. We’re people trying to do the best we can to serve our interests and good intentions. Criminals still get locked up, as far as I’m aware. When crimes are committed, goverment officials and corporate heads fall. Ask Rod Blagojevich when he’s released from prison in 14 years.

We have historically low tax rates, which both of you claim aid in job creation and that the ultra wealthy, which both of you are need for their tax rates to be lowered so they can create jobs.

The ultra wealthy do not create jobs, they hoard wealth using tax loopholes. Jobs are created by consumer demand; the more people we have working, the more goods & services will be needed to fill those demands.

How do you propose to fix the tax code so that the ultra wealthy pay more taxes than a bus driver? How do you propose to get average Americans back to work and able to earn a living wage (not the poverty level wages of minimum wage jobs)?

It may lead to Ron Paul challenging Gingrich to a Debate. I highly doubt that Gingrich would challenge Ron Paul. In fact, Gingrich would use the same ole’ excuse which the Media puts out there that Dr. Paul is way too radical for the Republican Party and the Presidency.

Moreover, time is short now. The Iowa Caucuses are 3 weeks away. Gingrich is “selecting” the weaker candidates to boost himself to the Electorate.

Daryl,
You have published here your “comments” 4 times. Maybe it is enough? This place is not VOTING BOOTH and not Ron Paul’s campaign headquarter. We have the voice too and rights to pick up any candidate we want. If we all will publish here about other candidates, it will be not enough space, and discussion will be closed by a moderator. Ron Paul’s activists / “propaganda machine” became too much active the last days. Nobody will listen you because of your aggressiveness.

@Michale I second your post. Daryl, please make a blog, really. Anyone who is interested in reading about RP and how he should be in every debate you say he should be in should go to your blog or Youtube channel. This forum is to discuss this Lincoln/Douglas debate, not an area for multiple posts from one person to advertise a candidate who hasn’t even participated in this debate.

Huntsman is insightful and knowledgable about foriegn issues, foreign concerns, and foreign affairs, in terms of America’s interests. I’m really glad to see Newt be tested in this way today, and I think he did well. I like Huntsman’s continued theme that America stands like a light on the hill for all nations. Good stuff today.

It’s pure incompetence, along with no consideration whatsoever for their audience that
c-span hasn’t posted even a short note as to when the debate has been rescheduled to stream or air. People have invited friends over to watch the debate at the TIME c-span has said ALL DAY LONG they would air it. That is at 8PM EST. Way to go C-span. Your quality, and traits continue to go both downhill, and to the left.

What a superb debate. I am still a Perry supporter, but this debate was really worth it. This format works superbly, and both candidates were able to express some excellent observations and ideas. Huntsman came up to Gingrich’s level, and I think the debate was great for both of them.

I also think, and I may be alone here, that we make a mistake to underestimate Obama. He is sly, well-spoken, lies when he has to, and has a natural consistency with everyone who gets a check from the government. Assuming the economy improves a little bit, this will be a close election, and whoever wins debates like these will win the election.

The quality of the video seemed to be a little less than professional. It looked like it was video taped then digitalized by computer. May be that is why it took so long to get out. (rendering takes forever) The wipes in the beginning looked out of place.

As far as the debate. They both won. I saw little differences between the two. Both were knowledgeable. Jon Huntsman seemed to be well prepared, spoke well, and meek. Newt seemed well prepared, spoke well and spoke with strength. I think I would like a president to speak with authority to a foreign leader, than a person who is a “get along” guy. The losers …the ones who did not show for the debate.

I just noticed that the debate is now on TV. CSpan-1, about 10 minutes delayed. The quality was up to normal. I must have been watching a different feed.
I do think Jon Huntsman increased his support from people who are not in the Newt/Ron group.

This was a very impressive and informative format for debate. I was not impressed with Huntsman in the earlier debates but in this one I see how intelligent and well-knowledgeable he really is regarding the world and have a more better and positive view of his position and of his person. Right now, I wouldn’t mind seeing a Gingrich-Huntsman ticket for president. They would seem to make a good team for our country.

Very enlightening, informative, and very positive. Please lend your ear and give these Lincoln Douglas debate like discussions between Gingrich and Huntsman a true, positive, and objective chance for your mind to grasp the significance and future vision and positive potential seemingly so apparently possible if these two became a team among other leaders in the white house.

Execellent, well thought out , and experienced articulation from Gov. Huntsman. His assets boad well for Americas future relationship with China. His positive message and overall thinking/position on a strong America and her values, abilities,duties as the world leader, and her shining example of liberty for all is refreshing and even moreso tremendously important today.

Huntsman thinks in terms of what and how the US still is and will be again a powerhouse of productivity, and how it’s people add value to the lives of others here and around the world. Current, other US leaders tear down peoples moral, undermine this and other countries stability and their leaders, and insult the intelligence of all. As a citizen of the US I know this to be true b/c I feel it everyday in the retoric and inactions/actions of the current regime.

Huntsman chooses to think and act above the mediocre and below. He has a good sound grasp of and personal experience in the matters of foreign relations, but even moreso is genuin in his approach to nuture positive relations with all people.

Until this debate, in it’s intimate nature I had not seen Huntsman in this light. I like him, as a person, and the leader of this country. I could be proud of him. And, hope to hear and see more of him.

This debate video contains two politicians who bow to Zionist influence and keep the continuously failed Keynesian economic policy of the Federal Reserve.

Every “economic bubble” contains a “boom” and a “bust”. An artificially inflated growth and an artificially deflated recession. The boom’s are ridden like a Surfer rides waves, buy the “insiders” and corrupt politicians alike. The bust’s are burdened by the average American peasant.

The Ron Paul supporters make denigrating comments about ALL the candidates. I have not seen their type of degrading comments from supporters of Gingrich, Romney, Perry, Bachman, Huntsman, and Santorum.

It is sad that the supporters of Ron Paul cannot conduct themselves as gentlemen and ladies. You are a poor reflection of the candidate you claim to love so much. Anyway, it’s a free country? and I will support whomever I want.

I have done my utmost to separate the followers from the candidate, who has a few ideas I support, but your conduct makes it increasingly difficult.

My suspicion is that the RP supporters have created multiple? e-mail accounts in order to create multiple YouTube, Facebook, and other social network accounts. Using these accounts they propagate variations of the same negative comments about ALL the other candidates, not just Newt. The other day a CNN reporter mentioned their sizeable presence on the Internet.

They obviously subscribe to their opponents YouTube’s or FaceBook’s in order to bombard the non-Paul candidates with regurgitated exaggerations. They also seem to believe everything they read.

There are various sources around the Internet that make negative exaggerations about Ron Paul. I dismiss most of them. Enemies will always create their own misleading version.

You reply to my post, claiming Ron Paul supporters “degrading comments” are not seen by other candidates supporters.

Wrong and wrong. Where in my post is this “degrading” material you speak of? The candidates proudly announce in the debate their pro-Zionist policies. They (except Ron Paul and Rick Perry) will continue the Keynesian economics of the Federal Reserve. How does my comment, which simply affirms the candidates own debate statements, come across as degrading?

It’s obvious you have been upset by a few Ron Paul supporters, perhaps they made degrading comments, but why reply to my post of objective statements with disdain for something other RP supporters said? Reply to the negative posts you speak of, not mine. Thanks.

But I acknowledge that your post didn’t contain any direct insults, as ‘B-Anderson’ and ‘Michael’s have. So you’re cool in my book. =)

I acknowledge your point. Thank you for staying level-headed. I think our misunderstanding stems from the fact that I clicked on ‘REPLY’ to YOUR comment. Please consider it a mis-click. In the future, to avoid confusion, I will be conscientious by posting a new reply to the main article unless I am specifically responding to someone’s post.

As I say, ,y comments were not aimed specifically at you, nor were they aimed at every single, solitary Ron Paul supporter; that would be generalizing. His supporters are individuals. And not all his supporters conduct themselves in the manner I was describing.

Let me try restating my point. My point was aimed at a SEGMENT of RP supporters.

RP supporters fall into different groups. I’ve had conversations with many in different web forums whom I regard as sincere and rational. They embrace what are probably the universal parts of his agenda. They express their point of view in a positive manner.

However, I find that others — again, A SEGMENT — are not so rational. What percent of the group are they? 10%, 20%, 30%? I’m not sure. Here’s the problem: They are very loud, arrogant, and obnoxious. They drown out the more reasonable RP supporters. They repeat every allegation as though it’s a proven fact. Anyone who questions a single point of theirs is “stupid”, “misinformed”, or hears something like “you need to do your research”.

Personally, if I were trying to support RP, I would say to the others: “Hey guys, tone it down, you’re making us look bad. We won’t win this way. Focus on his positive ideas.”

Does that clarify things? And, incidentally, I’ve said again and again in these forums that if he won, I’d vote for him. Obama has got to go.

As you see from the posts. Your negative comments about posters sre not welcome. You are not getting anyone to vote for RP. If anything you are causing people not to vote for him. So, in that light, keep it up.

Sorry folks no candidate is exempt from criticism, including my favorite. The debates are the time we get to know candidates, their views, backgrounds, weaknesses and strengths. And the discussions are a good way to hear and discuss others viewpoint’s. Whether a contributor is in support of or openly critical of a candidate doesn’t matter, with support and intelligent argument it all contributes to making a more informed choice. We are all engaged on this site through the reply section. If one would rather not hear critical information about their favorite candidate they would do better to move to a site supporting their candidate.

B Anderson and Chris will never get it and you’re wasting your time “debating” them.

It’s quite obvious that they are “clueless” to the impending implosion of Europe and the United States of America. When you quoted “Austrian vs Keynesian economics”, it went right over their heads.

Chris gave you a clue to his “cluelessness” when he quotes a CNN reporter. CNN will NOT report what is really happening to our economy, our money or our nation with this mounting Debt Crisis of over $17 Trillion. Europe’s economies are ready to collapse and the civil unrest is continuing to increase. However, people who are “clueless” won’t see it reported on CNN, and even if they did, they wouldn’t be able figure out why. Thus, when they turn to “tabloid” News Corporations like CNN, the reporters have nothing to say about it. They report things like RP supporters having a strong presence on the Internet and Justin Bieber’s Baby-Daddy problems. And when they turn and listen to the Plutocrat Politicians who are running for President (like Newt and Huntsman), NOBODY but Ron Paul is making it an Issue that we ALL should be paying attention to. It’s BIZARRE-Land 101 !

Maybe if they understood what a Trillion Dollars is, they might get it. Google “Chris Martenson – How much is a Trillion?”

I understand the skepticism of some of the commenters here, however, I do believe all of GOP candidates for 2012 are sincere and am more optimistic. RE: Gingrich; Sometimes it’s a good thing to have someone who has been on the ‘inside’ and turned around as Gingrich appears to have. I have to say that Huntsman certainly has my eye of late – I like his perceptions on a number of issues and his view of China relations. I don’t think Ron Paul can get the nomination but of course we all know his long view is correct. Gingrich is impressive and would definitely be valuable to any administration, Mitt Romney is safe. I am still investigating candidates and greatly admire a number of them but have not made up my mind. I do love these forums.

Nice post, Lynn. I agree with your thoughts about Gingrich and Ron Paul. I like Huntsman also, in terms of his knowledge and experience and his ability to communicate his thoughts and ideas on foreign issues, interests, and concerns. I like hearing Ron Paul’s ideas; I don’t see him being able to implement them and lead the nation. I don’t have any feel for Romney whatsoever. Some people minimize his $10,000 bet gesture at Perry, while others say it isolated him from the rest of the nation in a devastating way. It was tacky and inappropriate, and it was another example of a kind of nervous desperation about him. I don’t see strength or confidence in the man. They say that his biggest asset in becoming the Republican candidate is his funding, which will keep him in the race longer than the other candidates. That doesn’t lend to any confidence in the man either.

Looking forward to Thursday’s debate. Want to hear more from Gingrich, Huntsman, and Santorum.

Nice post Tony.. and Lynn. It’s good to see a guy like Huntsman up there. He actually seems relatively knowledgeable, sincere, and of good character. He is already comfortably wealthy and and his persona doesn’t reveal any intent to “sell out” to Lobbyists for any issue. A decent guy. I agree with both about Romney, he appears “safe” because he’s confident, experienced in both business + politics, and looks great on camera. But like Tony mentioned, there is something about him… including his continued rhetoric on job creation with no deep or detailed “plan” despite the Host’s re-iterating request for specifics!

Rick Perry has surprised me. At the end of the (pulled) Disney’s ABC debate, Rick Perry picks Ron Paul as the candidate whose most admirable and personally thanked him for arousing the Keynesian economic policy of the Federal Reserve. Mitt Romney also picked Ron Paul and mentioned the only signs he sees at Cold Events are RonPaul supporters, which negates the assumption that Internet RP Supporters make multiple accounts.

It’s good to see the Hosts drilling into the Candidates so firmly, preparing the emerger for the Real debate.

The only problem with Ron Paul for many people is his foreign policy and a fear that he would act too quickly and create chaos for the US but it seems to me that a lot of the candidates have expressed admiration for Ron Paul and support for many of his ideas. This is also true of other candidates ideas. I see this as very encouraging. Would be discouraging to see candidates disagree just to separate themselves from each other.